http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/12/using_states_to_supplant_cultural_leftism.html

It has everything to do with cultural and media brainwashing, a sort of desensitization to the idea of those things, things which used to (and not so very long ago, either) make people very uneasy.

wrong term… the term you want is normalization
combined with Marcuse sexualizing stuff…

Anyway, people “buy” by listening to the ad copy and the list of benefits and facts… the benefits can be lies and the facts can be false. and so, without real validation beyond the fact providers, they think whats best is what claims they hear that then lead to outcomes.

we have no movies about Russia and the gulags, china and Mao, and lots of stuff that would be important for them to know and not think were made up.

but ultimately, liars win when the truthful refuse to lie and the person that hears abdicates their responsibility to determine which.

however, where the women went their mates almost followed… up to a point… but for the most part, whither the ladies went, the men went, as Darwin doesn’t give other options. and the state reinforcing and backing it insured the direction it would take locally.

they picked up their cues from the movement drowning them in stuff and they then learned to take up their cues from media, so they would be on the right position, and so on. after all, from the first ones who abandoned a lot of the family traditions, to three generations on where they dont bother with family at all and there is no such history to pass down as each new generation is less participatory. and they certainly are not going to listen to their mates and cooperate, as doing that would be losing independence.

by the way, each of these generations had less family cohesion. more abuse, more poverty, were put in front of the tv to be minded, left with strangers who didn’t care, and so on (and more as the years passed). a large portion didn’t have two parents like the past, and lost all that came with that. including things like cohesion, consistency, help, advice, direction, etc… they were like the victims of war, but without the physical war to divide them.

Digressed. My point — that hard core is very active on the state and local level, possibly more active (if these things can be quantified) than their rightie counterparts. They live and breathe politics. It’s their very being. They’re the ones who made the political personal, or vice versa, or whatever the h#ll they were braying in the late sixties.

Anyway, no disagreement here, just a footnote to your post.

The left’s low-information voters wanted obama to win. They didn’t bother to find out what was going on at the state level.

Our school district is mainly conservative, even the teachers. (We’re some of those bitter clingers in PA.) He came home really angry about his reading story. It was about a young girl crossing the Rio Grande on a raft, trying to find her family. The border agent helps her come ashore and find her family. My son raised his hand and said to the teacher, “So in other words, they’re all illegal aliens and they expect us to believe that the border agent helped them break the law. It would never happen.” He was very insulted to be the target of propaganda.

In all fairness to your example (with which I do not wholly disagree), keep in mind that a welder goes to the work. S/he can relocate and find employment with another firm that employs welders. An Insurance agent can work for another insurance company in another state, but s/he essentially leaves his book of business behind. To rebuild that book of business is akin to starting out all over again from scratch, a proposition that those verging on retirement are not likely to consider.

One further comment about this “top down” v “bottom up” trend. The reason I used the term “intermediate future” in my comment above is that I don’t think that either direction will ever see a permanent victory. I think we’re dealing with a dynamic which, over a period of generations, is a back-and-forth struggle. Perhaps your example of MA fits such a theory in a shorter time: Republican governor when we can no longer afford liberal/progressive programs, liberal governor as soon as we can do so again. (Pure speculation on my part).